■  OF  T^g 
COLLEGE  OF  AG&fOlimiW 

cop\ 


UNIVERSITY    OF    CALIFORNIA 


AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT  STATION, 


BERKELEY,    CAL. 


E.   W.  HILGARD,  Director* 

E.  /.  WICK  SON,  Acting  Director. 


BULLETIN  NO.   101 


fURT}HEF?    EX/VJVIIJMATIOJM    Of   GALIfORNIA    PRUJMES,  AfRICOTS, 
PLUJV1S    /VND    JMECTARIJMES. 


Note. — For  the  purposes  of  this  discussion  a 
distinction  is  made  between  plums  and  prunes,  as  is 
common  in  the  horticultural  literature  of  this  State. 
By  the  term  "prune"  is  singified  a  plum  which 
dries  successfully,  without  removal  of  the  pit,  and 
produces  a  sweet  dried  fruit,  though  in  the  confu- 
sion of  our  nomenclature,  not  even  this  broad  classi- 
fication is  faithfully  followed.  For  example,  we 
have  the  "  Hungarian  prune  "  as  a  local  traditional 
name  for  Pond's  Seedling  plum,  which  has  no  value 
as  a  prune;  and  we  have  also  Coe's  Golden  Drop 
plum  which  does  answer  the  requirements  for  a 
dried  prune,  and  in  that  form  is  marketed  as  a 
prune,  and  sometimes  given  fancy  names  by  pack- 
ers. We  do  not,  however,  in  this  publication,  at- 
tempt to  correct  the  classification,  but  follow  the 
popular  arrangement. 

The  order  of  enumeration  of  fruits  in  the  head 
line  above,  and  in  the  tabular  statements  which 
follow,  is  based  upon  the  relative  commercial  im- 
portance of  the  fruits  in  this  State.  An  arrangement 
of  the  chief  table  of  analyses  is  also  made  to  bring 
into  juxtaposition  the  varieties  from  adjacent  regions 
of  the  State  that  effects  of  local  climates  and  soils 
upon  the  same  variety  may  be  disclosed  if  such  exist. 
As  this  is  only  the  beginning  of  such  investigation, 
the    results    in  this    regard     should     be     looked 

♦Absent  on  leave,  12  mos.,  from  June  15, 1892. 


upon  as  tentative.  Many  more  analyses  are  required 
to  demonstrate  constant  differences  of  this  nature, 
and  we  invite  the  sending  of  representative  samples 
of  named  varieties  from  all  parts  of  the  State.  It  is 
well  to  send  about  ten  pounds  of  each  variety,  each 
specimen  being  wrapped  to  prevent  bruising.  Such 
samples  may  be  sent  by  express  at  our  expense. 
Each  shipment  should  be  accompanied  by  a  letter 
giving  name  of  varfety,  age  of  tree  and  stock  upon 
which  it  is  budded  or  grafted,  location  of  orchard, 
and  name  of  grower  ;  also  notes  of  culture,  irriga- 
tion, etc.  Address  such  shipments  to  "  Agricultural 
Experiment  Station,  University  of  California,  Berke- 
ley, Calif." 

This  bulletin  is  a  continuation  of  the  work  re- 
ported in  Bulletin  97  of  this  Station,  and  in  some 
paragraphs  the  text  is  reproduced,  only  changing 
figures  to  include  the  results  of  a  greater  number  of 
analyses.  It  is  perhaps  only  fair  to  Mr.  Colby  to 
state  that  the  analyses  of  the  fruit  grown  in  1892 
are  his  personal  work,  and  have  been  made  without 
assistance.  E.  J.  Wickson. 

The  subjects  discussed  in  this  paper  are 
summarily  set  forth  in  the  following  quota- 
tion from  Bulletin  93  of  this  department : 

"The  purpose  of  this  work  is  to  show  compre- 
hensively the  proximate  and  ash  composition  of 


the  leading  varieties  of  fruit  as  grown  in  the  princi-  No.    34  (unirrigated).     Condition  only  fair, 

pal  fruit  regions;  and  inferential^,  the  influence  fruit    being    slightly  shriveled;    flesh   not  as 

exercised  upon  them  by  the  prominent  conditions  of  firm  ag  thgt  of  Nq  sjze  ,  tag^ 

soil,  climate,   fertilizers,   etc.       The  physical  data  __  ,    .  .    .     ^    ,x      _       ... 

,  *    •.         a   u     .    \  t  •  .      .  sweet.     No.  35  (winter  irrigated).    Condition 

(proportion  of  pits  to  flesh,  etc.,)   are  of  interest  . 

from  a  commercial  standpoint,  as  showing  what  is  Sood»  fruit  full>  well-rounded  and  firm- 
being  purchased  as  to  available  and  waste  material,  fleshed;  oversized,  flesh  tender  and  more 
etc.  juicy  than  that  of  No.  34.  No.  36  (irrigated 
"The  consumer,  though  usually  considering  fruit  jn  June).  Condition  fair,  fruit  slightly  shriv- 
as  a  luxury,  would  derive  much  valuable  knowledge  ded  and  yery  ripe>  nQt  as  large  as  either  Nq 

from  studying  the  fruits  in   their  relative   values  as  „     ,    ...  ^    _,    .       ,   ^-  lt_ 

*    *      rJ.  .  ,.  ,  •  „  34  or  35;  flesh,  like  that   of  No.  34,  rather 

foods.     The  nourishing  portions,  shown   especially  ^  UJ  '  ■'T' 

by  the  nitrogenous  and  saccharine  contents,  vary  coarse-textured  and  not  as  juicy  or  tender  as 

greatly  with  the  variety  and  conditions  of  growth,  that  of  No.  35. 

It  is  not,  then,  a  matter  of  indifference  to  the  con-        F.  M.  Righter,  vice  president  of  the  Camp- 

sumer  what  fruit  he  uses,  but  an  important  question  bell  Fruit  Growers'  Union,  writes:     "  There 

of  domestic  economy.  js  a  great  varjety  of  soil  in  this  valley;  it  is 

"The  ash  ingredients,  together  with  the  nitrogen  generally  a    gravelly  loam-a    sediment  de- 
contents  of  the  standard  varieties,  are  of  high  interest  .      ,  .      .,       _          „  .  , 

.7    .,  .        t.       e     ..  •  .      ..  posited  by  the  Los  Gatos  creek — and  upon 

in  connection  with  vital  question  of  sou  exhaustion  r  m  '  r 

and  fertilization.     The  soil  ingredients  extracted  by  this  the   prunes  were  grown.     This    soil    is 

an  ordinary  crop  are  a  serious  drain  upon  the  sup-  very  porous,  trees  cannot  be  injured  by  water 

porting  soil,  and  the  lines  of  heaviest  draft  can  only  during  winter — have    had    several    feet    of 

become  known  by  the  actual  determination  of  the  water  around  some  of  my  trees    as    late    as 

constitutents  withdrawn."  june  without  injuring  them.    The  soil  varies 

Description  of  Prunes,   Apricots   and  in  depth  from  10  to  18  feet,  in   some   places 

Plums  Received  in  1892.  the  soil  t0  the  depth  of  four  or   five   feet   is 

(For  a  description  of  these  fruits  received  very  sandy,  below  that  there  is  more  clay." 

and  analyzed  in  1891  see  bulletin  No.  97,  of       Nos.  40   and  41    French,  Ventura,   Ven- 

this  station.)  tura  Co. — J.  W.  Anderson,  grower;  samples 

prunes.  received  Sept.  5,   1892.     No.   40  "large"  is 

No.  31,  French,  Auburn,   Placer    Co.—  usual  in  size  ;   flesh,  firm,   rather  juicy  and 

Young  Bros.,  growers;  sample  received  Oct.  sweet  tasted.     No.  41    "small,"  undersized, 

7,1892;   condition   good;  size,  large;   taste,  large-pitted  fruit.     "These  prunes  are  from  a 

very  sweet;  flesh  firm  and  juicy.     "The  soil  mountain-valley  orchard  2>£  miles  from  sea, 

is  red  slate,  well  drained  with   southern   ex-  elevation  700  feet,  with   mountains  2000  feet 

posure;  very  little  irrigation  used."  high  between  the  valley  and   ocean.    The 

No.  32,  French,  Newcastle,  Placer   Co.—  larger  (No.  40)  was  raised   on  sandy  soil  ; 

E.  B.  Silva,  grower;  sample   received   Sept.  the  smaller  (No.  41)  ones  on  heavier  soil." 
23,  1892;  condition   somewhat  poor — fruit  a       No.  42,  French,  Pomona,  Los  Angeles  Co. 

little  shriveled   and  very  ripe;   size,   small;  —P.    M.   Doyle,  grower,   sample  received 

flesh  rather  juicy  and  very  sweet.  Sept.  6,  1892.     Condition,  good  ;  size,  usual; 

No.  33,  French,  Yuba  City,  Sutter  Co.—  fruit,  hard  and  juicy,  but  not  very  sweet. 
R.  C.  Kells,  grower;  sample  received  Sept.  Mr.  John  S.  Calkins,  who  procured  this 
27,  1892;  condition  fair,  but  very  ripe.  "The  sample  for  the  Station,  writes:  "These 
soil  is  a  sandy  loam  with  a  dark  clay  sub-  prunes  are  from  an  orchard  7  years  old, 
soil — top  soil  being  of  a  dark  gray  or  light  growing  on  sandy  loam  soil,  \\  miles  north- 
brown  color;  ranch  lays  about  three-quarters  east  of  Pomona,  on  the  Kingsley  tract, 
of  a  mile  from  west  bank  of  the  Feather  Trees  bore  good  crop  last  year,  also  being 
river,  drainage  good.  Trees  eight  years  very  full  this  year." 
old  on  peach  root."  No.  44,  French,   Chino,   San  Bernardino 

Nos.  34,  35  and  36,  French,  Campbell,  Co. — J.  W.  Lawson,  grower;  samples  re- 
Santa  Clara  Co.— Campbell  Fruit-Growers'  ceived  Sept.  20,  1892.  Conditions,  good; 
Union,  growers.  Samples  Nos.  34  and  35  flesh,  tender  and  juicy.  "Soil,  sandy  loam; 
received  Sept.  1,  '92;  No.  36,  Sept.  21,  '92.  elevation,  300-400  feet;  orchard  situated  2 


miles  due  north  of  Chino  Exp't.  Station. 
Trees,  5  years  old;  irrigation  resorted  to 
once  each  month  during  dry  season.  Ground 
has  been  fertilized  but  once  and  then  stable- 
manure  only  was  used." 

No.  37,  Robe  de  Sergent,  San  Jose,  Santa 
Clara  Co. — John  Rock,  grower;  sample  re- 
ceived Aug.  25,  1892.  Condition,  good  ; 
fully  ripe  and  more  juicy  than  that  of  No.  5; 
flesh,  tender  and  sweeter  than  the  previous 
year's  sample. 

No.  38,  Fellenberg,  San  Jose,  Santa 
Clara  Co.— John  Rock,  grower;  sample  re- 
ceived Aug.  25,  1892.  Condition,  good; 
fully  ripe;  flesh,  hard  and  juicy,  only  mod- 
erately sweet. 

No.  39,  Bulgarian,  San  Jose,  Santa  Clara 
Co. — John  Rock,  grower;  sample  received 
Sept.  30,  1892.  Condition,  rather  poor, 
over-ripe  and  shriveled;  examined  for  the 
sake  of  comparing  sugar  contents  with  that 
of  No.  8,  the  same  variety  of  crop  of  1891. 

Of  these  samples  Nos.  37,  38,  39,  Mr. 
Rock  says^  "Last  season  (1 891)  they  were 
all  overbearing  and  lacked  flavor,  this  year 
(1892)  the  crop  is  light  and  the  fruit  better. 
The  land  on  which  the  prunes  were  grown  is 
a  sandy  alluvial  soil,  made  by  deposits  from 
Coyote  Creek.  These  deposits  are  from 
four  to  six  feet  deep,  under  which  lays  a 
statum  of  three  to  four  feet  of  loam,  under 
this  a  sandy  layer  lighter  than  the  surface 
soil.  During  the  summer  the  ground  water 
is  from  fourteen  to  eighteen  feet  below  the 
surface." 

PLUMS.       * 

No.  45,  Coe's  Golden  Drop,  Auburn, 
Placer  Co. — Young  Bros.,  growers;  sample 
received  Oct.  7,  1892;  condition  good — 
sample  somewhat  larger  than  that  from 
Marysville  (No.  46);  flesh  firm  and  not  as 
juicy  as  the  French  prunes. 

No.  46,  Coe's  Golden  Drop,  Marysville, 
Yuba  Co. — Dr.  S.  Jewett,  grower;  sample 
received  Aug.  30,  1892;  condition  excellent; 
flesh  firm  and  juicy. 

No.  47,  Yellow  Egg,  Marysville,  Yuba 
Co. — Dr.  S.  Jewett,  grower;  sample  received 
Aug.  30,  1892;  condition  very  good;  flesh 
firm  and  more  juicy  than  that  of  the  other 
plums.    Both  No.  46  and  47  were  from  trees 


six  years  old  grown  on  heavy  sandy  loam 
soil  with  clay  sub-soil. 

APRICOTS. 

No.  25,  Royal,  Concord,  Contra  Costa 
Co. — J.  T.  Sutton,  grower;  sample  received 
Aug.  1,  1892;  condition  good;  sample  fully 
ripe  and  very  large,  from  young  trees  three 
years  old. 

No.  26,  Royal  Oleander,  Fresno  Co. — J. 
H.  Harding,  grower;  sample  received  June 

24,  1892;  condition  excellent;  undersized; 
flesh  quite  juicy,  but  not  very  sweet;  flavor 
peachy.  "This  year  my  trees  are  so  heavily 
loaded  that  the  fruit  is  very  small,  the  trees 
have  not  had  any  irrigation  for  two  years; 
age  of  trees  nine  years,  have  made  only 
medium  growth  and  have  borne  very 
heavily  for  five  years.  Soil  sandy,  slightly 
tending  to  white  ash,  sub-water  level  ten 
feet  below  surface." 

No.  27,  Royal,  Santa  Maria,  San  Luis 
Obispo  Co.  —  L.  E.  Blochman,  grower; 
sample  received  Aug.  10,  1892;  condition 
good,  quite  ripe,  color  high;  usual  size;  flesh 
firm  and  rather  juicy. 

No.  28,  Royal,  North  Pomona,  Los 
Angeles  Co. — Mrs.  J.  L.  Loomis,  grower; 
sample  received  July  2,  1892;  condition  ex- 
cellent; fruit  fully  ripe  and  quite  large;  flesh 
tender  and  very  juicy.  Mr.  J.  S.  Calkins, 
who  obtained  the  samples  for  the  Station, 
writes:  "Trees  seven  years  old,  in  gravelly 
loam  soil,  irrigated  once  this  year.  The 
location  is  about  three  miles  sotuh  of  the 
foothills  of  the  Sierra  Madre  mountains." 

No.  29,  Hemskirk,  Oleander,  Fresno  Co. 
— A.  Allision,  grower;  sample  received  June 

25,  1892;  condition  good;  flesh  firm  and 
juicy.  "Trees  nine  years  old,  heavy  regu- 
lar bearers,  soil  white  ash,  water  level  seven 
and  a  half  feet  below  surface." 

No.  30,  Moorpark,  Oleander,  Fresno 
Co. — J.  H.  Harding,  grower;  sample  re- 
ceived, June  25,  1892;  condition  very  good; 
color  light.  "Soil  sandy;  trees  nine  years  old 
and  unirrigated;  water  level,  ten  feet." 

NECTARINE. 

No.  48,  "  The  New  White,"  Yuba  City, 
Sutter  Co. — H.  P.  Stabler,  grower;  sample  re- 
ceived, Sept.   1,  1892;   condition  excellent; 


a  very  large-sized  light-colored  fruit,  very  smaller  difference  than  is  found  in  the  prunes 

juicy  and  pleasantly  tart  to  taste;  flesh  very  or  plums,  viz.,  3.8  per  cent  for  prunes  and 

delicate.  2.7  for  plums  as  against   1.8  for  apricots. 

Discussion  of  Results  of  Analyses.  The  averaSe  Ph   contents  is   6.2  per  cent; 

_ ,                   e  the  flesh,  then,  is  15  times  more  in   amount 

The  table  given  below  shows  the  results  of  .                „                   ,,        .   .    .      .  .-. 

,*?.,,                    „           ,  than  pits.   Here,  again,  there  is  but  a  trifling 

the  analytical  work  for  the  seasons  1891  and  ,     \                '   ?      \        .    .             , 

,  J      ,     n                                  y  advantage  in   choice  of  varieties,   so  far  as 

1892,  that   of   1892  covering  a  greater  area  .,                 .     ,,    t           a    .         ,    .   . 

*  '              ,      y ,        ,     ~       & ,  .  ,     ,     ,  the  proportion  "between  flesh  and  pit  is  con- 

of  the  State  than  that  of   1891,  which  dealt  r,r 

.  ,   „         ^,           ,;      ,    •        o  ,  cerned. 

mostly  with  Santa  Clara  valley  fruits.     Sub-  _             .      .  ,  t     £                  .    ' 

,.  .  .        ,      .         ,         ,      .  •  .       ,  For  equal  weights  of  prunes  and  apricots, 

division   A  gives  the    physical  and  genera  ,         /    ,     .  ?      ,     r                           . 

■ ,           ■    T       1       .  -   . *  whole  fresh   fruit,   the    consumer    receives 

proximate  analyses,  and  under  this  head  we  .     .                              t  „    ,             .... 

f          , ,   _             '      ..    ,             .  nearly  the  same  amount  of  flesh  or  available 

have  added  to   that   of    the  previous  season  ,         ,                      .    .         . 

,  ,        .    .  matter;   but  the   apricots   being   about  2.7 

the  separation  of  the  pit  into  its  component  .           ..         5 

r  ,    „         ,  ,         ,           ,              ,  times  larger  than  the  prunes,   we  have,  on 

parts — shells  and  kernels — and  reported  up-  . 

r     ,                                      ,    ,      r            r  the   average,   7.5  apricots   as  against  20.3 

on  the  nitrogen  contents   of  these  separate  ,         .   ,              „,,  . 

„'.,...       „     .         ,             ,        ,  prunes  per  pound  avoirdupois.     This  same 

parts.    Subdivision   B  gives  the  results   of  j.fl       r                         .  1!  »          4.       1 

,              ,            _    .     j  .         ,     .        ...  difference  seems  to  exist  between  the  plums 

the  complete  analysis  of  the   ash,   in   which  , 

we  have  considerably  extended  the  work,  as  .,  E„    ,an  ana,        0,  these  {ruits 

compared  w,th  that  of  1891,  to  northern  and  fi           which  do  not  differ  materia„v   from 

southern  California  fruits.  ...         t      .  .    ,    .     .,        ,           .  , ,       t. 

T     ,       , ,    ,       , .  ,  those   furnished    m  the  above    table;    the 

In  the   following   discussion   of  the  chief  •*.#■- 

,  ,       ,        , ,              .    ,,  average  pit  percentages   for  prunes   is  5.4, 

points  illustrated  by  the  tables,  we  shall  use  c               .    „  m  .-           .  .  .    ,        ,    .    .    . 

r    ,               ,  ^  ..    .                           r  for  apricots  5.3,  the   weights  for  whole  fruits 

such  parts  of  Bulletin  97  as  answer  for  com-  t ,    .        .            kU          .           t  .       ,  „ 

.  r                          / '             ,                 .  not  being  given  in  the  analyses  at  hand." 

parison,  etc.,  without  further  reference  to  it.  r~*                             t,                       ,     ,  „ 

r           '        '  The  proportion,  on  the  average,  of  shells 

Proportions  of  Pits  to  Flesh.  to  kernels  in  the  pits  of  the  prunes  and  apri 

Prunes. — The  range  in  the  percentages  of  cots  examined  seems  to  be  very  constant 

pits  is  from  3.7,  in  Hungarian,   No.  7,  to  7.5  and  nearly  the  same  for  both  fruits,  or  about 

in   Robe  de  Sergent,   No.   5;  5.8   per  cent  as  3  to   1.    The   kernels  of  all   these   fruits 

representing  the  general  averages  for   both  were  full    and   well  developed;   the  largest 

the  French  (No.  49)  and  all  prunes  (No.  50).  pits,  however,  do  not    show,  for  either  of 

(No.  39,  Bulgarian,  with   9.2  per  cent   pits,  these  fruits,  correspondingly  heavy  kernels, 

by  reason  of  its   over-ripeness,    is   not  in-  Proportion  of  Juice  to  Flesh, 

eluded  in  the  above  statement.)    The  later  Prunes  and  Plums. — The   French   prune 

work  then  verifies   our   previous  conclusion  on  the  average  shows  the  largest   proportion 

that  these  fruits  contain   about   17  times  as  of  free  juice,  4.3  per  cent  more   than   the 

much  flesh  as  pits.  average  for  all  the  prunes,  namely,   8^   per 

Plums. — In  these  the  range  in  the  percent-  cent,  or  about  four- fifths  of  the  flesh.     No. 

ages  of  pits,  somewhat  less  than  that  for  prunes,  7,  Hungarian,  while  the  largest  of  the  prunes 

is  from  3.4  per  cent  in  Coe's  Golden   Drop,  has  13  per  cent  less  juice  than   the   average 

No.  45,  to  6.1  per  cent   in   Yellow  Egg,  No.  French  prune,  i.    e.,  70  as  against   83   per 

47,  the  average  being  4. 8  per  cent,  leaving  cent.    The  plums ,  although  not  as  large   as 

nearly  20  times  as  much  flesh  as  pits.  the  Hungarian  prune,   are,   on  an  average, 

The  consumer  thus  finds   that  the  plums  about  5  per  cent   higher   in  juice,  a  figure 

possess  a  small  advantage  over  the  prunes,  which   nearly   expresses  the  difference   be- 

and  the    prunes,    on    the    whole,   amongst  tween  the   French   prunes  and  the  plums, 

themselves,    no  appreciable    advantage   in  Three-fourths  of  the  flesh  of  the  plum,  aver- 

regard  to  the  proportion  of  pits  to  flesh.  age,  is  juice,   thus  showing  the   prune-flesh 

Apricots. — For  the  fully-ripe  and  largely-  one-twentieth  more  juicy  than  than   that    of 

grown  varieties  from  all   localities  the  varia-  of  the  plum. 

tion  of  pit  percentages   is  from  5.3  (Moor-  Apricots. — The   proportion    of    juice    to 

park,  No.   30)  to    7.1   (Royal,    No.   26),  a  flesh  is  nearly  the  same  for  all  the  samples, 


an-aitsts 


OF    CALIFORNIA     FIVCnSTES, 


APRICOTS     AISTD    Fl/CXXrfIS, 

..-PROXIMATE   ANALYSES. 


CROPS    OF    XSei    A3&TJD    1892. 


PRUNES. 
Northern  California. 

French 

French 

French 

Central  California. 

Prune  d  Agen* 

Prune  d'Agen* 

Frenoh". 


Frenoh  (Winter  Irrigated). . 
French  (Irrigated  in  JuLe).. 

Wangenheim* 

Robe  de  Sergent* 

Robe  de  Sergent* 

Fellenberg*.,  

Fellenberg 

Hungarian* 

Bulgarian* 

Bulgarian 


Datte  d'Hongrie* 

St  Catherine* 

Southern  California. 

French  ("large"  ) 

Frenoh  (  "  small "  ) 

Frenoh 

Same  as  42,  after  keeping  three  weeks 

Frenoh 

Averages— FreDCta  Prunes  (13). 
Averages— All  Prunes  (23) 

PLUMS. 

Coe's  Oolden  Drop 

Ooe's  Golden  Drop 

Yellow  Egg 

Averages  of  Pluma(3) 

APRICOTS. 
Central  California. 

Royal 

Royal* 

Hemsklrk* 

Blenheim* 

Peach* 

Moorpark* 

Southern  California. 

Royal 

Royal 

Rojal    

Hemsklrk 

Moorpai  k 

Averages— Apr'cotn  (11) 

NECTARINE. 
"The  New  White" 


Production. 


Auburn.  Placer  Co 

Newcastle,  Placer  Co 

Yuba  City,  Sutter  Co 

Mt.  View,  Santa  Clara  Co . . 

Niles,  Alameda  Co 

San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
Campbell,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
Campbell,  Santa  Clara  Co. . 
Campbell,  Santa  Clara  Co. . 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co  . 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co. . 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
Ban  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co.. 
San  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co . . 

Ventura,  Ventura  Co 

Ventura,  Ventura  Co 

Pomona,  Los  Angeles  Co. . . 
Pomona,  Lob  Angeles  Co. . . 
Ohino,  San  Bernardino  Co. 


Auburn,  Placer  Co... 
Marysville,  Yuba  Co. . 
Marysville,  Yuba  Co.. 


Concord,  Contra  Costa  Co. , 

Niles,  Alameda  Co 

Niles,  Alameda  Co 

Niles,  Alameda  Co 

Niles,  Alameda  Co 

Niles,  Alameda  Co 


Oleander,  Fresno  Co. 

Santa  Maria,  Santa  Barbara  Co. 

Pomona,  Los  Angeles  Co 

Oleander,  Fresno  Co 

Oleander,  Fresno  Co 


Yuba  City,  Sutter  Co. 


igBros 

E.  B    Sllva , 

RC    Kells 

S.F.Leib , 

Wm.  Mortimer , 

John  Rock , 

pbell  Fruit-Growers'  Union 
Campbell  Fruit-Growers'  Union. 
Campbell  Fruit-Growers'  Union 

JuhnRock 

John  Rock 

John  Rock 

John  Rock , 

John  Rock 

John  Rook 

John  Rock 

John  Rock 

John  Rock 


John  Rook.. 


AND 

Analysis. 


Sept.  28,  1831 
Aug,  26,  1891 
8ept.  8,  1891 
Sept.  1,  1892 
Sept.  1,  1892 
Sept.  21.  1892 


J.  W. 

J.  W.  Anderson.. 

P.M.Doyle 

P.M.Doyle 

J.  W.  Lawson.... 


YouDg  Bros... 
Dr.  S.  Jewett. 
Dr.  S.  Jewett. 


T.  Sutton. 
Jas.  Shinn... 
Jas.  Shlnn... 
Jas.  Shlnn... 
Jas.  Shinn... 
Jas.  Shinn... 


Harding... 
L.  E.  Blochman 
Mrs.  J.  L.  Loom! 

A.Allison 

J.  H.  Harding... 


8,  1891 


Sept.  30.  1892 

Sept.    8,  1891 

Sept.    8,  1891 

Sept.   8,  1891 

Sept.    5,  1892 

Sept.    6.  1892 

Sept.    6,  1892 

Sept.  29,  1892 

Sept.  20,  189i 


1,  1892 
Aug.  7,  1891 
Aug.  14,  1891 
Aug.  3,  1891 
Aug.  14,  1891 
Aug.  19,  1891 

June  24,  1892 
Aug.  10, 
July  2,  1892 
June  25,  18»2 


PHYSICAL    ANALYSIS. 


21.0 
236 
256 

68.5 

51.0 
51.8 
60.4 


81.0 
57.5 
59.2 

41.7 
61.0 
67.0 
07.1 
66.5 
62.4 

102.5 


20.4 

23.1) 
16.0 
13.0 
19.0 
21.0 
24.0 
It.  3 
17.5 
17.5 
0.0 
18.8 
26.5 
18.9 
22.2 
20.0 

21.0 

28.1 
17.0 
22.0 
21.6 
20  4 
20  2 

6.6 


90.8 

95.3 
94.0 
94.8 

94.3 
93.8 
94.9 
93.5 
93.3 
94.2 
94.2 

96.6 

94.9 
93.9 
95.2 


0 

i  iS 
:  5.a 


pBf' 


91.8 
89.7 
92.8 
93.0 
89.9 
90.O 

89.3 


9.7 
14.2 
14.7 
10.0 
10.0 

9.2 
10.3 

7.2 

7.0 
10.1 
1O.0 


ll&i 


14,39 

'    H 

17.68 

33.10 

25.00 

28  69 

20  OO 

18.12 

19  60 

16.20 

17.97 


13.43 
13.43 
15.72 
13.58 

11.60 
13.10 
14  40 
11.04 
13.22 
13.31 

17.17 


Iff 


21.61 
22.04 
21.79 

18  52 
16.60 
18.87 
20.53 
20.83 
20.13 

9.26 
1178 
16.71 

9.20 
11.13 
11.20 

8.37 
16  30 

9.06 
13.36 
16.21 

20.20 
19.29 
15.20 
27.29 
20.53 
19  70 
16.11 

13.16 

14.90 

12.70 

13.25 


13  92 
8.43 
12.44 
14.34 

19.00 
18.10 
14.36 
*5.62 
19.16 
18.53 
15.35 


In  Fresh  Pita,  per  cent 


.070 
.000 
.060 
.040 

.053 

.08 


III 

19* 

Ifflf 


Hi 


General  Proximate  Analysis. 


71.31 
72.82 
77.88 

72.31 

BJ 

80.00 

77.43 


23.43 
19.905 
22.65 
34.394 


19.88 
17.14 
19.56 
13  96 
19.562 
14.11 
16.87 


16.63 
18.27 
20.78 


27.054 

19.497 
22.035 


14.962 
14.34 
14.70 
14.845 
14.05 
13.61 

15.194 
14.300 
15.773 
12.753 
13.567 


10000 
100.00 
100.00 


100.00 
100.00 
100.00 

100.00 


100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 


t  30  grams  are  equivalent  to  1  ounce. 


Analyses  published  in  Bulletin  97. 


.-ANALYSIS    OF    THE    ASH. 


I 

Fruit. 

Place 

of 

Production. 

s 

Composition  of  Pure  Ash. 

I 

1 

Fruit. 

Place 

of 

Production. 

i 
it 

i  a 

Composition  of  Pure  Ash. 

f 

f 

I 

I 

=1 
It 

:  ¥  §■ 

►8 

3>tr 

ft 

fl 

i 
f 

3 
j 

H 

i 

f 

! 

} 

E 

§ 

1 

j, 

1*9 

iff 

If 

if 

03 

If 

it 

1 

f 

fcll 

f 

•{ 

French  Prunes. 

>- Yuba  City,  Sutter  Co. . . . 
fSan  Jose,  Santa  Clara  Co. 
>  Pomona,  Los  Angeles  Co. 

.567 
.623 
.761 
.442 

•134 
.582 
.450 
.431 

S5I1 
.486 

66.92 
70.72 
24  63 
65.92 
69  50 
24.01 
63.67 
67.87 
20.60 
63.83 

.92 
.84 
H.13 
3.18 
3.07 
-1.63 

:i.2o 

11.99 

2.'e5 

6.27 

5.48 
15.04 
3.24 
3.01 
6.04 
148 
3.66 
12.96 
466 

5.56 
6.02 

11.58 
6.16 
5.33 

16.26 
4.70 
4.23 
9.72 
5.47 

1.70 
1.30 
6.13 
.85 
.83 
1.14 
1.89 
1.06 
10.41 
2.72 

.36 
.18 

2.38 
.31 
.17 

1.90 
.61 
.33 

2.31 

.39 

12.91 
11.16 
29.49 
13.19 
11.56 
32.98 
16.14 
15.23 
25.92 
14.08 

2.54 
2.40 
4.13 

2  37 
2.13 
5.40 

3  15 
2.84 
4.63 

2.68 

2.67 
2.44 
6.33 
4.56 
4.30 
7.88 
1.99 
1.46 
7.41 
3.07      .1 

43 
40 
13 
19 
20 
22 
40 
37 
72 
S4 

99.98 
100.00 
99.97 
99.97 
100.10 
100.16 
100.13 
100.04 
100.01 
99.99 

.10 

.11 

.03 
.05 
.05 
.05 
.10 
.09 
.18 
.08 

99.88 
99.89 
99.94 
99.92 
100.05 
100.11 
100.03 
99.95 
99.83 
99.91 

»{ 

»{ 

54 

Royal  Apricots. 

[•Niles,  Alameda  Co. 

1-  Pomona,  Los  Angeles  Co. 

.550 
.542 
.681 

.407 
.459 
.592 

.508 

54.88 
58.69 
10.95 

63.85 
67.00 
23.09 

59.36 

10.67 
11.20 
3.45 

9.95 
10.23 
6.45 

10.26 

3.62 
3.24 
6.75 

2.82 
2.65 
6.58 

317 

3.85 
3.31 
11.58 

3.62 
2.89 
11.22 

3.68 

1.71 

.77 

12.39 

1.66 

.97 

10.06 

1.68 

.21 

.09 
1.66 

.54 

.39 
2.20 

.37 

13.86 
11.20 
43.76 

12.33 
10.88 
30.96 

13.09 

2.95 
2.76 
5.38 

2.32 
2.35 
1.84 

2.63 

7.85 
8.31 
2.58 

2.62 
2.27 
7.09 

5.23 

.60 
.58 
1.65 

.30 
.28 
.51 

.45 

100.00 
100.04 
100.14 

99.91 
100.11 
100.00 

99.92 

.15 
.14 

.40 

.08 
.07 

.12 

.11 

99.85 
99.90 
99.74 

Whole  Fruit 

99.83 
100.04 
99.88 

Whole  Fruit 

Average  (Whole  Fruit) 

53 

Average  (Whole  Fruit) 

99.81 

\ 


90  pet  cent,  or  nine-tenths  of  the  flesh  being  juice  contained  33.10  pet   Cent   sugar,   of 

juice.    No.  29,  Hemskirk,  with  93  per  cent,  nearly  double  what  the  original  sample  had. 

being  the  juiciest,  and  No.    15,  Blenheim,  Referring    again    to  the  so-called  hard- 

with  85  per  cent,  the  driest  of  the  series.  fleshed  varities,  Robe  de  Sergent,  Fellenberg, 

The  average  flesh  of  the  apricots,  from  Bulgarian,  etc.,  we  note  some  differences  in 

this  latest  showing,  is  more  juicy  than  that  the  sugar  contents  in  favor  of  the  later  crop 

of  the  prunes,  in  the  ratio  of  9  to  8.  samples.     No.  37,  Robe  de  Sergent,  shows 

5.38  per  cent   more  than    No.  5  ;    No.  38, 

Sugar  Contents  of  the  Juice,  Flesh  Fellenberg)  2$  per  cent  more   than  No.    6. 

an       ru  Xm  No.  39,  Bulgarian,  nearly  13  per  cent  more 

The  work  undertaken  for  the  crops  of  1891  than  No.  8,  a  difference  rather  greater  than 

and  1892  did  not  comprehend  the  determi-  we  could  probably  expect  if  the   samples 

nation  of  the  different  sugars  (dextrose,  lev-  were  more  nearly  alike  in  maturity.     No. 

ulose,  cane  sugar,  etc.),  contained  in   prunes  39)  as  above  stated  in   its   description,  was 

and  apricots;  the  length   of  time  necessary  far  over-ripe.    Some  of  these  results  may  be 

to  complete  such  an   investigation  for  each  explained  as  due  to  the  evident  difference  in 

sample,  required  us  to  limit  the  work  to   the  maturity  at  the  time  of  the  examination  for 

determination  of  the  most  important  point—  tw0  crops,  and,  as  Mr.  Rock  writes   in  the 

the  total  sugars.  description  above,  to  the  general  inferiority 

Prunes.  —  The  ripe,  juicy  soft-fleshed  of  the  earlier  crop  ('91). 
French  prunes  from  all  localities  yield  the  The  plums^  among  themselves  show,  in 
highest  sugar  percentages,  averaging  (No.  the  juice,  a  narrow  range  in  sugar  and 
49),  in  the  juice,  23.69  per  cent;  the  hard-  average  about  18.0  per  cent  of  that  sub- 
fleshed  ripe  prunes,  represented  by  Nos.  4,  stance — some  5.5  per  cent  less  than  the 
5,  37,  6,  38,  7,  8,  9,  10  and  12  yield  an  aver-  French  prunes,  and  about  3.5  more  than 
age  of  15.24  per  cent  sugar — 6.24  per  cent  the  hard-fleshed  varieties, 
less,  while  the  average  sugar  for  the  average  Apricots. — The  fruit  from  early  localities 
of  all  prunes  (No.  50)  is  20.00  per  cent,  or  (picked  in  June)  and  from  later  localities 
3.5  per  cent  less  than  that  of  the  French  (picked  in  August)  show  a  remarkably  close 
prunes.  We  note,  for  the  later  crop  French  resemblance  to  each  other  in  regard  to  sugar 
prunes,  a  difference  of  five  weeks  between  contents;  the  Royal,  No.  16,  with  15.06  per 
the  earliest  and  latest  picking,  No.  34  picked  cent,  and  Peach,  No.  17,  with  15.72,  the 
on  Sept.  1,  and  No.  31  gathered  on  Oct.  7,  highest  in  sugar,  showing  but  about  2  per 
yet  in  the  juice  these  contain  nearly  identical  cent  more  than  the  general  average,  13.31 
amounts  of  sugar,  25.30  per  cent,  which,  per  cent,  for  the  juice.  Taking  the  general 
when  referred  to  the  fresh  fruit,  shows  the  averages  of  sugar  in  the  juice  of  prunes  and 
earlier  sample  to  stand  one  per  cent  lower  apricots  (Nos.  50  and  52),  we  find  that  the 
than  the  later,  on  account  of  its  being  more  prunes  run  over  6  per  cent  higher;  for  the 
iuicy.  The  maximum  sugar  percentage,  whole  fruit,  4.2  per  cent  higher.  And  as 
26  45,  in  the  juice  is  seen  in  No.  32  from  compared  with  the  average  French  prune 
Newcastle,  picked  on  Sept.  23 — 1.45  per  cent  (No.  49)  the  apricots  show  for  the  juice 
higher  than  the  earliest  and  latest  French  some  10  per  cent  less  sugar;  for  the  whole 
prunes  contain.  This  sample  (No.  32)  and  fruit,  somewhat  over  7  per  cent  less.  On 
the  others  from  the  various  localities  gath-  the  whole  fruit,  the  sugars  of  the  apricots 
ered  in  the  third  and  fourth  week  of  Sep-  and  plums  more  nearly  resemble  each  other 
tember  point  to  that  time  as  yielding  the  in  amount,  the  average  difference  being  1.79 
juiciest  and  sweetest  fruits  of  their  kind,  per  cent  in  favor  of  the  plums.  From  the 
No.  42,  from  Pomona,  shows  the  least  sugar  results  at  hand,  it  seems  that  the  Nectarine, 
in  the  juice,  17.68  per  cent;  this  sample  as  No.  48,  has  in  the  juice  nearly  4  per  cent 
No.  43,  after  keeping  three  weeks  at  a  tem-  more  sugar  than  the  apricot,  following  in 
perature  of  6o°  F.,  was  still  only  a  little  this  respect  very  closely  the  plums, 
shriveled  and  quite  edible,  showed  that  its  European  reports  of  these  fruits  show  that 


c 


the  juice  of  prunes,  dn  the  average,  contains 
6.15  per  cent  sugar,  apricots  469  per  cent 
(one  case  is  reported  of  a  small  variety  of 
apricots  with  16.5  per  cent  sugar),  these 
figures  being  about  three  times  less  than 
those  herein  presented  for  these  fruits  as 
grown  in  California.  There  seems  thus  to 
be  good  cause  for  the  preference  they  have 
so  quickly  attained  in  the  market. 

By  reference  to  the  small  table  following 
the  relations  to  each  other  of  the  average 
sugar  and  acid  contents  of  some  California 
fruits  will  readily  be  seen.  For  convenience 
of  comparison,  the  acid  is  expressed  in  terms 
of  sulphuric  acid  (S03). 

PERCENTAGES  OF  SUGAR  AND   ACID. 


Apricots 

Prunes 

French  prunes 

Plums 

Peaches  from  Shas- 
ta and  Butte  Cos.. 

Nectarine 

Grapes  from  various 
localities 

Oranges  from  vari- 
ous localities 

Figs  (White  Adri- 
atic) from  Kern 
and  Fresno  Cos 


JUICE. 


WHOLE 
FRUIT. 


Acid, 
per 
cent. 


.40 
.31 

.48 

.24 
.62 

.50 

1.28 


Sugar,  per  cent. 


13.31 
20.00 


17.97 


17.00 
17.17 


24.00 
10.68 


15       23.90 


11.93 
16.11 
19.70 
13.25 

13.40 
15.13 

23.00 

7.12 


1110 
15  35 

1853 
12.89 

12.50 
1411 

20.70 

5.40 

19.20 


Acid  in    the  Juice. 

Prunes. — The  maximum,  nearly  one  per 
cent,  is  at  once  seen  in  Hungarian,  No.  7; 
the  minimum,  .23  per  cent,  in  the  Prune 
d'Agen,  No.  1;  the  average,  .40  per  cent,  be- 
ing almost  twice  the  minimum. 

Ptums.—Htre  again  we  find  a  very  wide 
difference,  even  greater  than  the  prunes 
show  ;  the  maximum  being  1.00  per  cent, 
the  minimum  .20  per  cent  and  average  .48 
per  cent. 

Apricots. — While  the  acids  differ  from  .50 
per  cent  to  .90  per  cent,  they  do  not  show  as 
great  a  diversity  as  the  prunes  in  this  re- 
spect but  on  the  average  contain  like  the 
nectarine  about  .20  per  cent  more  acid. 

In  all  these  fruits  it  appears  that  low  acids 
are  combined  with  high  sugars.  European 
analyses,  which  report  the  acid  in  terms  of 
Malic,  when  corrected  for  Sulphuric,  give 
for  prunes  .51  percent,  apricots,  .70  per  cent, 


and  peaches  .5$  per  cent,  which  do  not 
differ  much,  except  for  peaches,  from  those 
we  report. 

Nutritive   Values-Nitrogen  Contents. 

"The  flesh-forming  ingredients  of  any 
article  of  food  being  of  great  importance  as 
regards  its  proper  uses  (see  Bulletin  93  of  the 
department,  relating  to  oranges  and  lemons), 
it  is  of  especial  interest  to  compare  in  this 
respect  the  prune,  plum  and  apricot  to  other 
fruits,  and  the  different  varieties  of  prunes, 
plums  and  apricots  amongst  themselves." 

The  following  little  table  shows  how  these 
different  fruits  we  have  studied,  may  be  rated 
in  their  albuminoid  contents,  and  distribu- 
tion of  the  same  in  the  several  parts  of  the 
fruit,  as  well  as  how  they  compare  with 
European  fruits. 

AVERAGE  PERCENTAGES  OF   ALBUMINOIDS. 


FRUITS. 

>*• 

u 

<t>  ^ 

IN 
WHOLE 
FRUIT. 
TOTAL. 

IN  THE  FRESH 
FLESH,  OR  ED- 
IBLE PORTION. 

IN  FRESH 

PITS, 
OR  BIND. 

Calculated  upon  whole 
fresh  fruit. 

ORANGES. 

California 

European 

35 

1.14 
1.78 

1.25 
.49 

1.012 
.780 

1.13 

.40 

.375 

1.50 

1.42 

.731 

.760 

.380 

(Sicilian) 

APRICOTS. 

California 

European 

11 

1.088 
.837 

.162 

PRUNES. 

California 

20 

.175 

PLUMS. 

California 

European 

3 

1.00 

.130 

APPLES  <fc  PEARS. 

European 

FIGS. 

California 

2 

(1.50) 

(WhiteAdriat'c) 

(Smyrna; 

NECTARINES. 

.625 

.106 

So  far  then,  the  fig  rates  first  in  flesh- form- 
ing ingredients,  with  little  choice  between 
the  apricots  and  plums  for  second ;  and  for 
third  place,  the  prunes  and  oranges  run 
nearly  even.  Apparently,  the  Nectarine 
falls  far  short  of  the  above  fruits  in  these 
ingredients,  but  still  ranges  considerably 
higher  than  apples  and  pears  (from  European 
data  only). 

The  prunes  of  the  last  crop  ('92),  have,  in 
in  general,  yielded  a  higher  average  albu- 
minoid contents  in  the  flesh,  for  we  find  .84 


as  against  .76  per  cent  for  crop  '91.  The 
maximum  of  the  series  is  seen  in  Nos.  33 
and  44,  French  prunes,  which  contain,  in 
the  edible  portion  alone,  1.30  per  cent  albu- 
minoids, or  .36  per  cent  more  than  the  max- 
imum (.94  per  cent)  of  the  crop  of  '91.  At 
no  great  distance  we  see  placed  No.  34,  with 
1. 12  per  cent  of  these  materials;  No.  5, 
Robe  de  Sergent,  still  shows  the  minimum 
amount,  .52  per  cent.  The  French  prunes 
and  plums  have  the  eame  quantity  of  albu- 
minoids in  the  flesh,  1.12  per  cent.  In  as 
far  as  these  flesh-forming  ingredients  were 
determined  iu  the  hard-fleshed  varities,  we 
do  not  find  such  differences  as  in  the  French 
prunes  in  total  amounts  between  the  two 
crops ;  Nos.  6  and  38,  Fallenberg,  having 
respectively  .139  and  .140  per  cents  total, 
and.  1 17  and  .113  per  cents  in  the  fresh 
flesh ;  Nos.  5  and  37,  Robe  de  Sergent 
yield  for  totals  respectively  .134  and  .130 
per  cents,  and  for  fresh  flesh  .083  and  .113 
per  cents. 

Among  the  apricots,  the  flesh  shows  wide 
differences  in  albuminoids,  that  of  central 
California  fruits  yielding  the  highest  figures 
in  most  instances,  and  as  compared  with 
prune  flesh,  much  greater  variation.  The 
maximum  of  1.44  per  cent  albuminoids,  in 
the  flesh,  is  at  once  seen  in  No.  25,  Royal, 
from  Contra  Costa  Co.,  and  the  minimum 
of  .737  per  cent  in  No.  30,  Moorpark,  Fresno 
Co.;  with  an  average  of  1.0  per  cent  for  all. 

With  this  portion  of  our  work  we  give  be- 
low a  summary  of  the  food  constituents  of 
some  of  our  dried  (cured)  commercial 
French  prunes,  dried  apricots,  grapes  and 
figs.  The  results,  while  inadequate  as  a 
basis  for  general  conclusions  as  to  the  rela- 
tive food  values  of  these  fruits,  nevertheless 
indicate  plainly  that  the  nutrients,  notably 
the  sugar  and  crude  protein  (albuminoids) 
differ  very  widely,  e  g.  the  sugar  in  the  grape 
food  is  20  per  cent  more  than  that  of  either 
the  apricot  or  apple,  12  per  cent  more  than 
that  in  the  French  prune,  and  only  5  per  cent 
less  than  what  is  given  for  the  dried  fig 
(white  Adriatic).  Again,  the  fig  with  4.50 
crude  protein  is  1.60  per  cent  richer  than 
the  grape,  apricot,  and  French  prune;  how- 
ever, these  latter  fruits  are  all  nearly  twice 
as  rich  as  the  apple  in  albuminoids.      The 


maximum  ash  is  in  the  fig — on  the  average 
about  1  per  cent  more  than  that  in  the  other 
fruits. 

PERCENTAGE  COMPOSITION  OP  DRIED  FRUITS. 


CONTENTS. 
PER   CENT. 

>t  CD 
C  B 
Bo 

> 
►B 

M. 
O 

s 

0 

3 

era 

CO 

•B 
"B 

5* 

m 

Dried. 
Edible 
Portion. 

to 
|*  g. 

:    ct>  T 

'  CD 

H 

C 
B 

Water 

25.20 
150 

2.80 

32.44 

1.88 

2.90 

34.83 
1.16 

2.94 
3.70 

2.17 

.56 

52.50 

.85 
1.29 

25.00 
2  24 

4.50 

20  03 
2.45 

5.70 

33.00 

Ash 

1.40 

Album  i  n  0  i  d  s 
(Crude    Pro- 
tein)  

170 

Crude  Fiber  ~| 

8.30 

Nitrogen—  1 
free  extract  [ 

Fat J 

Sugar 

29.77 

32.18 

10.11 

13.82 

21.60 

40.53 
.40 

29.59 
1.51 

57.60 

.45 

58.00 

32.00 

Free  Acid,  cai- 
culated  as 
Sulphuric 
(SOa) 

2.00 

Tannin 

100.00 

100.00 

Total 

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

*Dried  and  ground  by  R.  E.  Wood,  Rutherford, 
Napa  Co.,  Cal. 

Under  this  head,  nitrogen  contents,  it  is 
worth  referring  again  to  the  large  table  to 
call  attention  to  the  distribution  of  the  ni- 
trogen in  the  several  portions  of  these  fruits( 
First,  then,  it  is  readily  seen  that  the  flesh 
holds  85  per  cent  of  all  the  nitrogen,  leaving 
15  per  cent  of  it  as  waste,  so  far  as  food 
values  are  concerned.  Second,  the  distribu- 
tion of  the  nitrogen  of  the  pits  of  the  prunes 
and  apricots,  to  the  kernels  and  shells  ap- 
pears to  rate  on  the  whole  about  the  same, 
(12  to  1)  although  we  note  great  variation  in 
this  respect  in  both  fruits. 

Ash  Composition  and   Nitrogen   Con- 
tents. 

Contrary  to  statements  in  our  previous 
publications  (Bulletins  88  and  93  of  this  de- 
partment), in  which,  according  to  European 
data,  the  orange  stands  second  (grapes  being 
first)  among  fruits  in  the  quantity  of  mineral 
matter  withdrawn  from  the  soil,  we  find  that, 
weight  for  weight,  the  fig  has  second  place, 
the  orange  third,  and  the  prune,  apricot  and 
plum  fourth  place;  thus  more  than  ever 
bringing  before  us  the  fact  that  we  cannot 
safely  use  European  results,  as  heretofore, 
as  a  basis  of  comparison  for  our  fruits. 


8 


Upon  the  basis  of  the  preceding  table  of 
this  publication,  those  given  in  Bulletins  93 
and  97  and  the  yet  unpublished  work  upon 
our  figs,  we  have  prepared  the  following 
tabular  view  of  the  amounts,  in  pounds,  of 
vital  soil  ingredients  extracted  by  the  differ- 
ent fruit  crops  (poor  fruit  alone)  that  will 
have  to  be  replaced  by  fertilization. 


SOIL   INGBEDIENTS    EXTRACTED    BY    DIFFERENT    FRUIT 
CROPS. 


Total 

Phos. 

FRUITS. 

Ash 

Potash 

acid 

Nitrogen 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

GRAPES. 

European. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

8.8 

5.00 

1.52 

1.70 

APRICOTS. 

European. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

4.90 
147.00 

.86 

Crop  of  30,000  lbs 

25.80 

California. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

4.91 

2.90 

.64 

1.94 

Crop  of  30  000  lbs 

147.30 

87.00 

19.20 

59.20 

PRUNES. 

European. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

G.3 

3.73 

.95 

1.22 

Crop  of  30,000  lbs 

189.00 

111.90 

28  53 

36.60 

California. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

4.86 

3.10 

.68 

1.62 

Crop  of  30,000  lbs 

145.80 

93.00 

20.40 

48.60 

PLUMS. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

5.35 

1.81 

ORANGES. 

European. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

6.07 

2.78 

.67 

2.69 

Crop  of  20,000  lba 

121.40 

55.60 

13.40 

53.80 

California. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

4.32 

2.11 

.53 

1.83 

Crop  of  20,000  lbs 

86.40 

42.20 

10.60 

36.60 

FIGS. 

European. 

In  each  1000  lbs 

8.00 

2.27 

.10 

2.27 

Crop  of  15,000  lbs 

120.00 

34.05 

1.50 

34.05 

California. 

(White  Adriatic.) 

In  each  1000  lbs 

7.81 

4.69 

.86 

2.38 

crop  of  15,000  lbs 

117.15 

70.45 

12.90 

35.70 

California  prunes  thus  appear  to  draw 
much  less  upon  all  the  mineral  ingredients 
which  have  to  be  replaced  by  fertilization 
than  the  European;  the  latter,  however, 
draw  much  more  lightly  than  the  former 
upon  nitrogen.  Apricots  both  of  California 
and  European  growth  stand,  in  total  amount, 
about  equal  as  to  mineral  ingredients  with- 
drawn; as  to  nitrogen,  the  California  fruit 
draws  twice  as  much,  showing  the  only  very 
material  difference  in  the  relative  propor- 
tions of  the  vital  soil  ingredients  among 
themselves  as  far  as  these  two  fruits  are  con- 
cerned. 

Potash. — In  the  ashes  of  prunes  and  apri- 
cots and  in  the  orange,  potash  is  seen  to  be 
the  leading  ingredient;   in   the   prunes   and 


apricots  fully  three-fifths  of  the  whole  ash 
and  in  orange  at  least  one-half.  In  its  dis- 
tribution as  between  pits  and  flesh,  the 
greatest  difference  is  shown  by  the  European 
prune;  for  apricots  we  have  no  foreign  data. 
Although  potash  constitutes  so  large  a  por- 
tion of  the  ash  of  these  fruits  its  replenish- 
ment to  the  soil  will  be  delayed  long  beyond 
the  addition  of  other  fertilizing  ingredients, 
because  most  California  soils  are  naturally 
so  well  stocked  with  it  that  available  potash 
for  the  current  demand  will,  in  many  cases 
be  adequately  supplied  for  many  years. 

Phosphoric  Acid  is  not  so  heavily  drawn 
upon  in  this  respect  as  the  European.  Its 
distribution  between  pits  and  flesh,  also,  is 
not  quite  so  variable  as  that  of  potash. 
Since  our  soils  usually  contain  a  limited 
supply  of  phosphoric  acid,  the  prune  and 
apricot  as  well  as  the  orange  orchards  will 
require phosphatic  fertilizers  first,  when  they 
are  used. 

Nitrogen. — Among  our  pitted  fruits  the 
apricot  leads  in  its  demand  upon  the  soil  in 
this  substance,  plums  being  quite  the  aver- 
age of  the  apricots  and  prunes  and  re- 
semble very  much  the  orange  in  this 
respect.  Thus  we  find  that,  for  the  southern 
localities  especially,  the  same  necessity  of 
early  replacement  of  nitrogen  in  pitted  fruit 
as  for  orange  orchards  and  partly  for  the 
same  reason,  viz.,  that  California  soils  are 
usually  not  rich  in  their  natural  supply  of 
this  substance. 

Of  the  other  ash  ingredients,  it  will  be 
seen  that  lime  is  quite  constant,  although 
much  less  in  amount  (for  prunes)  than 
European  standards  show.  Especially  is 
this  difference  seen  in  the  comparison  of  the 
ash  analyses  of  the  flesh  and  pits.  In  the 
orange  ash  the  lime  content  far  exceeds  that 
of  either  the  prune  or  apricot;  accordingly, 
as  our  soils  generally  contain  plenty  of  lime, 
even  for  oranges,  we  would  rarely  expect  to 
fertilize  with  a  view  to  its  replacement. 
Soda  is  seen  to  be  much  higher  here  than 
in  European  analyses  of  the  ash  of  the 
prune;  this  is  probably  explained  by  the  fact 
that  California  soils,  like  those  of  other  arid 
regions,  contain  much  more  soda  than  the 
European.  Geo.  E.  Colby. 


